[Awaiting Payment 26th Aug, 2024] [$250] Expense - Incorrect member count in report details after commenting or inviting another member

[lanitochka17]

If you haven’t already, check out our contributing guidelines for onboarding and email [email protected] to request to join our Slack channel!

---

Version Number: 9.0.15-0
Reproducible in staging?: Y
Reproducible in production?: Y
If this was caught during regression testing, add the test name, ID and link from TestRail: https://expensify.testrail.io/index.php?/tests/view/4784292
Issue reported by: Applause - Internal Team

Action Performed:

1. Go to staging.new.expensify.com
2. Submit an expense to User B
3. Click on the expense preview in the main chat to go to expense report
4. Send a user mention containing User C
5. Click Invite from the whisper
6. Click on the report header
7. Click Members

Expected Result:

In Step 6, the member count will update correctly

Actual Result:

In Step 6, the member count shows 1 member, when there are three members in the report (Step 7)
This issue also happens when user comments on the expense report without inviting a third user

Workaround:

Unknown

Platforms:

Which of our officially supported platforms is this issue occurring on?

• Android: Native
• Android: mWeb Chrome
• iOS: Native
• iOS: mWeb Safari
• MacOS: Chrome / Safari
• MacOS: Desktop

Screenshots/Videos

Add any screenshot/video evidence

Bug6557055_1722323368219.20240730_150250.mp4

View all open jobs on GitHub

Upwork Automation - Do Not Edit

• Upwork Job URL: https://www.upwork.com/jobs/~01ca5b97965eb72787
• Upwork Job ID: 1819133324859524397
• Last Price Increase: 2024-08-01
• Automatic offers:
• suneox | Reviewer | 103398512
• FitseTLT | Contributor | 103398514

[melvin-bot]

Triggered auto assignment to @trjExpensify (Bug), see https://stackoverflow.com/c/expensify/questions/14418 for more details. Please add this bug to a GH project, as outlined in the SO.

[lanitochka17]

@trjExpensify FYI I haven't added the External label as I wasn't 100% sure about this issue. Please take a look and add the label if you agree it's a bug and can be handled by external contributors

[FitseTLT]

Proposal

Please re-state the problem that we are trying to solve in this issue.

member count doesn't agree with the member list count

What is the root cause of that problem?

The criteria to hide a hidden participant is not the same in details page

App/src/pages/ReportDetailsPage.tsx

Lines 139 to 140 in 49f0958

	const shouldExcludeHiddenParticipants = !isGroupChat && !isSystemChat;
	return ReportUtils.getParticipantsAccountIDsForDisplay(report, shouldExcludeHiddenParticipants);

and in participants page

App/src/pages/ReportParticipantsPage.tsx

Lines 67 to 68 in 49f0958

	const shouldExcludeHiddenParticipants = !isGroupChat && !isIOUReport;
	const chatParticipants = ReportUtils.getParticipantsAccountIDsForDisplay(report, shouldExcludeHiddenParticipants);

What changes do you think we should make in order to solve the problem?

The members menu item navigates to two page: participants and members page based on the report type as in here

App/src/pages/ReportDetailsPage.tsx

Lines 309 to 315 in 49f0958

	if (isUserCreatedPolicyRoom || isChatThread || (isPolicyExpenseChat && isPolicyAdmin)) {
	Navigation.navigate(ROUTES.ROOM_MEMBERS.getRoute(report?.reportID ?? '-1'));
	} else {
	Navigation.navigate(ROUTES.REPORT_PARTICIPANTS.getRoute(report?.reportID ?? '-1'));
	}
	},
	});

What we should do is the members menu count shown in the count should be the length of the members list shown in participants or members page so we should make those values agree.

1. In participants page the participants are filtered based on shouldExcludeHiddenParticipants value set here

App/src/pages/ReportParticipantsPage.tsx

Lines 67 to 68 in 49f0958

	const shouldExcludeHiddenParticipants = !isGroupChat && !isIOUReport;
	const chatParticipants = ReportUtils.getParticipantsAccountIDsForDisplay(report, shouldExcludeHiddenParticipants);

and if the detail doesn't exist

App/src/pages/ReportParticipantsPage.tsx

Lines 71 to 74 in 49f0958

	const details = personalDetails?.[accountID];
	if (!details) {
	Log.hmmm(`[ReportParticipantsPage] no personal details found for Group chat member with accountID: ${accountID}`);
	return;

2. In members page the should ExcludeHidden is true

App/src/pages/RoomMembersPage.tsx

Lines 172 to 173 in 49f0958

	const participants = ReportUtils.getParticipantsAccountIDsForDisplay(report, true);

and also we filter out optimistic duplicate accountID or the detail doesn't exist here

App/src/pages/RoomMembersPage.tsx

Lines 180 to 184 in 49f0958

	const isDuplicateOptimisticDetail = details?.isOptimisticPersonalDetail && participants.some((accID) => accID !== accountID && details.login === personalDetails[accID]?.login);
	if (!details || isDuplicateOptimisticDetail) {
	Log.hmmm(`[RoomMembersPage] no personal details found for room member with accountID: ${accountID}`);
	return;

So we calculate the members count based on these conditions
So in ReportDetails Page we use this code

const participants = useMemo(() => {
        const shouldExcludeHiddenParticipants = isUserCreatedPolicyRoom || isChatThread || (isPolicyExpenseChat && isPolicyAdmin) ? true : !isGroupChat && !isIOUReport;
        return ReportUtils.getParticipantsAccountIDsForDisplay(report, shouldExcludeHiddenParticipants);
    }, [report, isGroupChat, isSystemChat]);
const activeChatMembers = participants.flatMap((accountID) => {
        const details = personalDetails?.[accountID];
        const isDuplicateOptimisticDetail = details?.isOptimisticPersonalDetail && participants.some((accID) => accID !== accountID && details.login === personalDetails?.[accID]?.login);

        const pendingMember = report?.pendingChatMembers?.findLast((member) => member.accountID === accountID.toString());
        return !!details && !isDuplicateOptimisticDetail && (!pendingMember || pendingMember.pendingAction !== CONST.RED_BRICK_ROAD_PENDING_ACTION.DELETE) ? accountID : [];
    });

We can leave out the pendingMember condition to make it more compatible with list shown in members page and also we can use a new variable in place of participants we need to keep the previous variable

What alternative solutions did you explore? (Optional)

[trjExpensify]

Sending external, but I'd like @puneetlath eyes on this as it's related to hidden members behaviour.

[melvin-bot]

Job added to Upwork: https://www.upwork.com/jobs/~01ca5b97965eb72787

[melvin-bot]

Triggered auto assignment to Contributor-plus team member for initial proposal review - @suneox (External)

[daledah]

Proposal

Please re-state the problem that we are trying to solve in this issue.

In Step 6, the member count shows 1 member, when there are three members in the report (Step 7)
This issue also happens when user comments on the expense report without inviting a third user

What is the root cause of that problem?

We already fix the missing members issue in ReportParticipantPage in PR
but does not fix it in ReportDetailsPage

What changes do you think we should make in order to solve the problem?

We should apply the same fix in:

App/src/pages/ReportDetailsPage.tsx

Line 140 in 157afbf

const shouldExcludeHiddenParticipants = !isGroupChat && !isSystemChat;

const shouldExcludeHiddenParticipants = !isGroupChat && !isSystemChat && !isIOUReport;

What alternative solutions did you explore? (Optional)

[github-actions]

true

[daledah]

Updated proposal to fix minor typo issue

[suneox]

@daledah proposal only updates the condition to get participants based on ReportParticipantsPage, but on ReportDetailsPage we display active members for both ReportParticipantsPage and RoomMembersPage.
Therefore, @FitseTLT proposal which retrieves active members based on both linked pages will be reasonable in this case.

So we can go with @FitseTLT this proposal.

🎀 👀 🎀 C+ reviewed

[melvin-bot]

Triggered auto assignment to @techievivek, see https://stackoverflow.com/c/expensify/questions/7972 for more details.

[melvin-bot]

📣 @suneox 🎉 An offer has been automatically sent to your Upwork account for the Reviewer role 🎉 Thanks for contributing to the Expensify app!

Offer link
Upwork job

[melvin-bot]

📣 @FitseTLT 🎉 An offer has been automatically sent to your Upwork account for the Contributor role 🎉 Thanks for contributing to the Expensify app!

Offer link
Upwork job
Please accept the offer and leave a comment on the Github issue letting us know when we can expect a PR to be ready for review 🧑‍💻
Keep in mind: Code of Conduct | Contributing 📖

[techievivek]

Not overdue, job is assigned to @FitseTLT

[suneox]

@FitseTLT Could you please update the ETA?

[FitseTLT]

PR will be ready tomorrow 👍

[trjExpensify]

PR hit prod 7 days ago, automation failed.

Payment summary as follows:

• $250 to @FitseTLT for the fix
• $250 to @suneox for the C+ review

Paid you both, closing!